A Federal High Court in Lagos has turned down Access Bank Plc’s request to freeze the bank accounts of MTN Nigeria Communications Plc over a disputed N180.95 billion debt claim connected to long-expired infrastructure-sharing deal with now-defunct Multi-Links Telecommunications.
Ruling on an ex parte application filed by Access Bank and three companies in receivership, Multi-Links Telecommunications Limited, Capcom Telecoms Limited, and Cyancom Limited, Justice Akintayo Aluko rejected Access Bank Plc’s request to issue an interim order to freeze MTN’s funds.
Justice Akintayo insisted that MTN deserves the chance to be heard before drastic steps are taken.
The Legal Dispute:
Access Bank, via its legal counsel, Mr. Kunle Ogunba (SAN), had asked for an interim injunction preventing MTN from withdrawing or accessing funds across all its accounts in Nigeria up to the amount of N180.95 billion.
The financial institution claimed the figure represents a long-standing debt owed by MTN to Multi-Links.
The bank also requested that every financial institution in Nigeria should be forced to declare, under oath, the balances in MTN’s accounts within one week.
The suit, tagged FHC/L/CS/1004/2025, basically tried to ensure MTN’s funds remain inaccessible pending the result of the main suit.
However, Justice Akintayo ruled that, even though the plaintiffs have presented a solid case, MTN deserves the right to respond.
“Due to the peculiar nature of the case and the potential implications of the orders sought, especially in light of MTN’s correspondence marked ‘MTN 17,’ the defendant must be heard before any orders are granted,” Akintayo said, according to ThisDay Newspaper.
The court ordered the telecommunications company to show up in court within 5 days, with the case adjourned to June 23, 2025.
Backstory:
The main reason for the dispute is a fibre-sharing agreement between MTN and Multi-Links, which dates back more than 10 years, according to sources.
The agreement gave both parties “irrefutable rights of use” of each other’s fibre infrastructure for a decade, expiring in 2024.
However, because of financial and operational challenges, Multi-Links reportedly underutilised MTN’s infrastructure while MTN overutilised Multi-Links’ network.
As Multi-Links faced financial capitulation, the telecommunications company went into receivership under the control of Diamond Bank. Before folding up, Multi-Links tried to sell its fibre assets to MTN; however, negotiations broke down because both parties couldn’t agree on the price.
A few years later, a company named Hoop Telecoms popped up on the scene, claiming to have bought Multi-Links’ fibre infrastructure. However, Hoop reportedly failed to take responsibility for Multi-Links’ past liabilities. Despite this, Hoop billed MTN almost N170 billion, retroactively charging for years before its supposed acquisition of the assets.
MTN immediately frowned at the 170M demand, calculating its actual obligation under the original agreement at just over N1 billion. The company involved the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) afterwards, and Hoop Telecoms was found guilty of lacking a valid telecom licence, meaning zero legal backing to make such claims.
The saga escalated after Access Bank acquired Diamond Bank 6 years ago, assuming control of Multi-Links’ receivership. According to sources close to the case, Access Bank sided with Hoop Telecoms’ claims and filed for a legal settlement, but MTN fought back.
A source said that various vested interests, including politicians, saw the claim as an opportunity to force MTN into a payout.
“There was talk that pushing MTN to pay could benefit everyone involved. But MTN stood its ground and sought legal protection,” the source said.
Amid the legal drama, MTN ran to the court for protection; however, to the telecomm company’s surprise, Access Bank simultaneously approached a court seeking a Mareva injunction, a legal order to freeze MTN’s accounts across Nigerian banks to the tune of N180.95 billion.
Such orders are normally issued when a plaintiff suspects the defendant might dissipate assets to prolong the court judgment.
Sources said that Access Bank might not have been completely briefed on the background details of the Multi-Links-MTN arrangement and could now be reconsidering its stance.
An insider confirmed that MTN and Access Bank are currently trying to work out how the matter can be resolved via dialogue.
What Next?
Since the judge refused to grant the Mareva injunction, MTN can breathe easy for now; however, the legal war is not even close to being over.
The company now has until the 23rd of June to formally present a compelling case to convince the court not to freeze its accounts.
MTN refused to comment when contacted, stressing that the case is subjudice. Access Bank has also yet to respond to any enquiry thus far.
While the final outcome is still unknown, the case raises further questions about how telecom agreements are enforced, the legal risks involved with receivership claims, and how non-commercial interests can influence disputes between top companies.
